GST Refund Not Denied for Portal Upload Limits | HC

Case Details: Jyoti Agro vs. Deputy Commissioner of State Tax - [2026] 182 taxmann.com 630 (Gujarat)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• A.S. Supehia & Pranav Trivedi, JJ.
• Avinash Poddar & Gaurang Shah for the Member.
• Ms Shrunjal Shah, AGP & Ms Anchal A. Poddar for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

The petitioner-assessee filed an application seeking a refund of accumulated IGST arising from zero-rated supplies, but was unable to upload shipping bills on the GST portal due to size constraints. The petitioner submitted that attempts were made to furnish hard copies of the shipping bills, which were not accepted by the jurisdictional officer under CGST. It was contended that the refund claim was rejected on the ground that the undertaking or declaration was not properly signed, alleging non-compliance with the guidelines prescribed under Circular No. 125/44/2019-GST, dated 18-11-2019. It was further submitted that upon rejection of the refund claim, the amount was re-credited through Form GST PMT-03 into the electronic credit ledger, following which another refund application was attempted to be filed, but the GST portal displayed an error indicating that an application for the same period had already been filed. Thereafter, a fresh refund application was filed under the category ‘Any Other,’ against which a deficiency memo was issued stating that the application was not in accordance with Rule 89 of the CGST Rules and that the refund amount had not been debited from the electronic credit ledger. Reliance was placed upon judicial precedents to contend that procedural limitations of the electronic system should not defeat a substantive refund claim. The matter was accordingly placed before the High Court.

High Court Held

The High Court held that where substantive conditions are satisfied, a refund cannot be denied due to technical errors or lacunae in the electronic system. It was observed that the inability to upload shipping bills due to portal size constraints and non-acceptance of hard copies resulted in procedural difficulties that could not defeat a legitimate claim. The High Court referred to Section 54 of the Gujarat GST Act and Rule 89 of the Gujarat GST Rules and concluded that procedural requirements should not override substantive compliance. Relying on judicial precedents, it was held that benefits otherwise admissible cannot be denied on account of technical limitations of the portal, and the respondent authority was directed to pass an appropriate order in accordance with law.

List of Cases Reviewed

• Shree Renuka Sugars Ltd. v. State of Gujarat [2023] 152 taxmann.com 550/100 GST 159/78 GSTL 324 (Gujarat) (para 2), followed

List of Cases Referred to

• Shree Renuka Sugars Ltd. v. State of Gujarat [2023] 152 taxmann.com 550/100 GST 159/78 GSTL 324 (Gujarat) (para 2).